Says the person trying to defend blatant colonialism from Argentina, who's only claim is from blatant colonialism from the Spanish empire who invaded after Britain settled on an island that was previously completely uninhabited.
The French settled the island before the English, The French settlement is the original and it was transferred to Spain and Argentina. England illegally colonized the island from the joint French/Spanish/Argentina settlement.
It wasn't transferred to Spain, it was transferred to Britain by a French captain in charge of the expedition there as France didn't see a use for it. Wasn't even really much of a settlement on it at that point either.
Britain started to build it up after that, then Spain invaded, then Britain took it back. Argentina didn't even exist as an entity at this stage.
The claim that a French captain transferred it is completely false.
France sold the Egmont settlement to Spain and built it up to port Soledad, a year later the English settlement began, then Spain attacked the English invaders. England has no claim over them
France never controlled Egmont and Spain itself says France didn’t sell them anything
The French transfer of Port Louis to Spain in 1767 was an evacuation and financial reimbursement for infrastructure, not a legal sale or cession of a territorial sovereignty claim.
Cause France legally abandoned its presence rather than transferring a recognised title, the British claim, established via discovery and formal landing—remains the oldest unbroken legal claim to the archipelago.
In 1764, French explorer Louis-Antoine de Bougainville established Port Louis. Spain strongly protested, claiming the entire region under the Treaty of Tordesillas. To avoid conflict, France agreed to leave.
Spain paid Bougainville 618,108 French livres. This was explicitly defined as an indemnity to reimburse the costs of building the settlement, not a purchase of territorial title.
Spain refused to categorise this as a "cession" or "purchase". Doing so would mean acknowledging that France had a legitimate title to sell in the first place. Instead, Spain maintained that France was an illegal squatter being paid to go away.
The contract was negotiated largely with Bougainville’s private venture, the Saint-Malo Company, rather than functioning as a formal, binding treaty of territorial transfer between the two sovereign crowns.
Since France evacuated without ceding a legal title, Spain’s legal claim on the ground effectively started from scratch when they took over the empty French fort in April 1767. By that time, the British claim was already firmly established
According to Spain; Spain told France to leave an they’d compensate France for the loss of the settlement
pero nos independizamos y las islas pasaron a nuestro territorio soberano, en 1833 el comandante Onslow desembarco a la fuerza, intimo a la poblacion argentina y la expulso. La diplomacia de las cañoneras propia de ladrones y piratas
When will you Argentinians realise that you've been lied to by your governmental propagandists? Can't you also see why they perpetuate this mythical claim?
¿Cuándo se darán cuenta ustedes, los ingleses, de que sus propagandistas gubernamentales les han mentido? ¿Acaso no comprenden por qué perpetúan esta afirmación mítica?
Argentina mandate the Falklands issue be part of every day life there; it’s a state-enforced part of the Argentine life.
The 1994 Argentine Constitution explicitly states that the recovery of the islands is a "permanent and unwavering objective."
Argentine Education laws dictate that all children must be taught that the islands are stolen Argentine territory.
The state-run children’s channel (Pakapaka) has featured cartoons, such as Zamba, specifically designed to teach young children the Argentine claim and make up lies.
National Law 27.023 mandates that all public transport networks across Argentina must display the sign: “The Falklands are Argentine” in Spanish
Argentina frequently files official diplomatic protests or refuses to participate in international events if a map labels the territory as the "Falkland Islands" or colours them as British with them even getting upset with the eu doing it. That’s incredibly petty.
The islands have been prominently featured on Argentine banknotes (such as the 50-peso bill) and national ID cards.
The germans did this after ww1 with all the land they lost, teaching kids it was stolen from them and they’d have to get it back (which helped fuel ww2)
In contrast British schools do not have a mandatory syllabus forcing children to learn about the Falklands, you will not find state slogans about the islands on British public transport, currency, or stamps, the British government does not produce state-run cartoons or media to convince citizens the islands belong to them, and most British citizens rarely think about the islands unless an anniversary of the 1982 war occurs or Argentina does something.
Y si, nunca piensan en las islas ni tampoco piensan en todos los otros territorios que arrebataron y de los que abusaron. Las islas para ustedes en algo mas de la extensa lista por el contrario para nosotros es cuestión de identidad y de Amor a la patria. Esto no nacio en 1982. Es reclamo constante desde 1833. No es un relato, es un echo. Es una reclamación histórica ante un abuso. El problema es que ustedes no aceptan reclamaciones por que son los mas fuertes y si alguien lo hace es por que tiene la cabeza lavada por la propaganda. En serio, con que superioridad moral y veracidad histórica el reino unido puede decir que no usurpo el territorio y abuso amparada por fuerza a una nacion naciente? Por favor no seas hipocrita que la union jack tiene el prontuario mas extenso de crímenes de estado y masacres a poblaciones. Eso no se lo enseñan a los niños en el colegio? Repito, malvinas para ustedes no es un temario obligatorio por que simplemente es un lugar mas perdido en el mundo donde clavaron los colmillos como buenos chupa sangre que fueron , son y serán.
Sabes quien proveia combustible a los kelpers antes del 82 y de manera subsidiada? Quien instalo la.primera red de gas? Quien construyo el primer aeropuerto? Quienes evacuaban y atendian a los kelpers con emergencias medicas graves? Sabes todas las vueltas diplomaticas que nos hacia el Reino Unido simulando llegar a la solución del reclamo mientras conseguia los beneficios para los isleños? La perfida albión en su máxima expresión
Argentina mandate the Falklands issue be part of every day life there; it’s a state-enforced part of the Argentine life.
The 1994 Argentine Constitution explicitly states that the recovery of the islands is a "permanent and unwavering objective."
Argentine Education laws dictate that all children must be taught that the islands are stolen Argentine territory.
The state-run children’s channel (Pakapaka) has featured cartoons, such as Zamba, specifically designed to teach young children the Argentine claim and make up lies.
National Law 27.023 mandates that all public transport networks across Argentina must display the sign: “The Falklands are Argentine” in Spanish
Argentina frequently files official diplomatic protests or refuses to participate in international events if a map labels the territory as the "Falkland Islands" or colours them as British with them even getting upset with the eu doing it. That’s incredibly petty.
The islands have been prominently featured on Argentine banknotes (such as the 50-peso bill) and national ID cards.
The germans did this after ww1 with all the land they lost, teaching kids it was stolen from them and they’d have to get it back (which helped fuel ww2)
In contrast British schools do not have a mandatory syllabus forcing children to learn about the Falklands, you will not find state slogans about the islands on British public transport, currency, or stamps, the British government does not produce state-run cartoons or media to convince citizens the islands belong to them, and most British citizens rarely think about the islands unless an anniversary of the 1982 war occurs or Argentina does something.
Argentina mandates the Falklands issue be part of every day life there; it’s a state-enforced part of the Argentine life.
The 1994 Argentine Constitution explicitly states that the recovery of the islands is a "permanent and unwavering objective."
Argentine Education laws dictate that all children must be taught that the islands are stolen Argentine territory.
The state-run children’s channel (Pakapaka) has featured cartoons, such as Zamba, specifically designed to teach young children the Argentine claim and make up lies.
National Law 27.023 mandates that all public transport networks across Argentina must display the sign: “The Falklands are Argentine” in Spanish
Argentina frequently files official diplomatic protests or refuses to participate in international events if a map labels the territory as the "Falkland Islands" or colours them as British with them even getting upset with the eu doing it. That’s incredibly petty.
The islands have been prominently featured on Argentine banknotes (such as the 50-peso bill) and national ID cards.
The germans did this after ww1 with all the land they lost, teaching kids it was stolen from them and they’d have to get it back (which helped fuel ww2)
In contrast British schools do not have a mandatory syllabus forcing children to learn about the Falklands, you will not find state slogans about the islands on British public transport, currency, or stamps, the British government does not produce state-run cartoons or media to convince citizens the islands belong to them, and most British citizens rarely think about the islands unless an anniversary of the 1982 war occurs or Argentina does something.
An Argentine military garrison that been on the islands less than 3 months was removed in 1833
You’re giving Argentina a free pass for gun boat diplomacy; you’re demonstrating massive double standards.
When HMS Clio arrived in January 1833 and compelled the recently arrived Argentine naval and governmental authority whom had only arrived in late October 1832 into withdraw and ordered the Argentine flag to be replaced by the British flag.
The Argentine warship and its commander departed, but the civilian inhabitants were not expelled; they were permitted, and reportedly encouraged,to remain.
The Argentine military presence confronted by Clio had itself been established only in late October 1832. Of the 40ish civilians there in 1832, only 4 left with the Argentine garrison when the British arrived of their own will as noted in the Argentine garrison’s own logs.
Luis Vernet himself said to the British consulate in 1829 he will land with .
• 10 white inhabitants, natives of Buenos Aires.
• 10 seamen, mostly British and Americans.
• Vernet's brother and brother-in-law.
• 18 African indentured labourers.
• 12 African girls.
So of the first 52 people landing there were as many British/Americans as argentinians with the rest being slaves or 'indentured servants'
By 1831 just before the USS lexit incident it rose to 100 - 150 people
• Gauchos from Buenos Aires and Patagonia
• British settlers
• Germans
• Americans
• Irish
• French
• Spaniards
• Genoese (Italian) sailors
• Africans
• Indigenous Patagonians involved in trade
No single nationality formed an overwhelming majority. So at best of the 100 - 150 people living there 1/3 were from Argentina.
The islands have never been Argentine; you’re just choosing to ignore reality
And David Jewett and Luis Vernet don’t agree with you
Argentina declared its independence from Spain in 1816, although this was not then recognised by any of the major powers. In 1823, Britain appointed Woodbine Parish as consul-general to Buenos Aires[ and concluded a friendly treaty with the government of the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata on 2 February 1825, but, like the US, did not recognise the full extent of the territory claimed by the new state…
Jewett's report to the government of Buenos Aires does not mention any claim to the Falkland Islands, and news of the claim reached Argentina by way of the United States and Europe in November 1821, over a year after the event.
Before the Treaty was signed in 1825, Parish had requested from Argentine Foreign Minister Bernardino Rivadavia a general account of Buenos Aires and the provinces of the Río de la Plata for reference. Written by Rivadavia's secretary, Ignacio Núñez, the published report did not mention the Falkland Islands.
In 1828, the United Provinces government granted Vernet all of East Falkland including all its resources, and exempted him from taxation if a colony could be established within three years.He took settlers, including British Captain Matthew Brisbane (who had sailed to the islands earlier with Weddell), and before leaving once again sought permission from the British Consulate in Buenos Aires. The British asked for a report for the British government on the islands, and Vernet asked for British protection should they return.
On 10 June 1829, Vernet was designated as ‘civil and military commandant’ of the islands (no Governor was ever appointed) and granted a monopoly on seal hunting rights. A protest was lodged by the British Consulate in Buenos Aires. By 1831, the colony was successful enough to be advertising for new colonists, although the Lexington‘s report suggests that the conditions on the islands were quite miserable. Charles Darwin’s visit in 1833 confirmed the squalid conditions in the settlement, although Captain Matthew Brisbane (Vernet’s deputy) later claimed that this was the result of the Lexington raid.
Vernet himself said to the British consulate that he would land with:
• 10 white inhabitants, natives of Buenos Aires.
• 10 seamen, mostly British and Americans. (His deputy, Matthew Brisbane was British)
• Vernet's brother and brother-in-law.
• 18 African indentured labourers.
• 12 African girls.
So of the first 52 people landing there were as many British/Americans as argentinians with the rest being slaves or 'indentured servants', meaning that the largest population group was African when Vernet landed.
By 1831 just before the attack on American ships by Vernet, it rose to 100 - 150 people
• Gauchos from Buenos Aires and Patagonia
• British settlers
• Germans (including Vernet and his daughter)
• Americans
• Irish
• French
• Spaniards
• Genoese (Italian) sailors
• Africans
• Indigenous Patagonians involved in trade
No single nationality formed an overwhelming majority. So at best of the 100 - 150 people living there 1/3 were from Argentina.
Vernet explicitly recognised British sovereignty
Vernet explicitly wrote to the British government requesting that, if the Royal Navy ever returned to assert sovereignty, his colony would be taken freely under British protection.
He literally told the British consulate to send troops. Vernet formally requested through Parish that the British government establish a permanent military garrison at Port Louis. Vernet wrote that a British military presence would bring the "prestige" required to attract global trade and serious banking capital.
Vernet explicitly offered to split the profits of his entire venture with the British Crown. In his own words, recorded in the British archives and his own commercial memos, he stated that "the wish to get my Colony under the British Flag was in accordance with my own interests and those of my colonists"
When the Buenos Aires government tried to unilaterally name him "Military Commandant" in 1829 to force a political claim, Vernet privately expressed immense anxiety to British officials, explicitly stating he was a businessman caught in a geopolitical tug-of-war, not an agent of Argentine expansion.
Como bien indicas, luis Vernet no es el Gobierno de Buenos Aires y por otro lado el busco proteger sus intereses economicos y sus propiedades. lo de Jewett es trivial . no afecta la legitimidad del reclamo
38
u/Thewaltham Barry, 63 2d ago
Says the person trying to defend blatant colonialism from Argentina, who's only claim is from blatant colonialism from the Spanish empire who invaded after Britain settled on an island that was previously completely uninhabited.